Calculated Outrage

The controversial statements of Trump and other political ‘outsiders’ should be taken for what they really are

Many in the UK remain bemused as to how Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, which has been saturated with outrageous statements and controversy, has been so successful. Over here, Gordon Brown’s ‘bigoted woman’ moment in 2010 dented Labour’s election campaign, and stuck with him until election day, whereas Trump gets away with saying pretty much whatever he wants; while he gets criticized by some sections of the media, he keeps on winning primaries.

In fact, the horrible things Trump says actually bolster his campaign. They play to the narrative of him being a ‘political outsider’, one who says exactly what he thinks without concern for whether it’s politically correct or not. Americans are growing increasingly immune to political spin, and any politician who appears to be pandering to the electorate is viewed with suspicion.

As such, a candidate who makes controversial comments on the regular is granted an air of integrity. Many Trump supporters will admit that they don’t agree with all the controversial things Trump says, but they appreciate the fact that he says them nonetheless; they’d rather he were truthful about his views than lie about them.

To dissuade Trump supporters then, the best tactic is perhaps not to talk about the horrible things he’s said during his campaign; they’re already aware of them, and actually find them somewhat appealing. Rather, it would be better to point out that in all likelihood, Trump’s outrageous comments are every bit as calculated as the ‘marketed for mass appeal’ politically correct comments of other candidates.

Positioning yourself as a political outsider is an increasingly used tactic in politics all across modern democracies. Politicians generally aren't very popular nowadays; we've all had too much experience of beaming, well-groomed candidates promising so much on the campaign trail, only to break promises and disappoint once elected.

Even established politicians try to portray themselves as outside ‘the system’. Watch any electoral debate with more than two candidates involved, and you’ll always see the same thing: two or more candidates will get into an argument, at which point another candidate will interrupt to say ‘I'm not going to get involved in this political point scoring, I'm here because I care about you, the voters.’

They do this to try and draw a contrast; these other candidates are part of the establishment, bickering between themselves, while I'm just a regular citizen trying to do some good.

Here in the UK, outsiders are increasingly popular. Jeremy Corbyn rose to the leadership of the Labour party due in part to his backbencher history, of going against the party line and opposing Labour governments. UKIP’s Nigel Farage is constantly reminding the public that he’s an outsider to Westminster (not for want of trying, mind.) Both of these often say things which generate controversy (of very different sorts) in the press, and both further endear themselves to a disillusioned public by doing so.

Being the outsider, and being a little ‘rough around the edges’, is a strategy that has seen growing success across democracies in recent years. Trump knows this, and has doubled down on the ‘non-politician’ approach.

As with any supposed ‘outsider’, foraying into the world of politics, I would advise scepticism. If you agree with Trump’s policies (those which we know of), that’s one thing, but don’t become enamoured with him simply because ‘he’s not a politician.’ There’s no reason to think that the way his campaign is conducted is any less calculated, or any less of a cynical manipulation of the public mood, than any other campaign.

If someone is running for office, they’re a politician, whether they acknowledge this fact or not.